Esquiver poker gratuites net pc game casino liste jeux casino jeu de poker gratuitement play baccarat online…

a2a5beff9a2a98ecea67…

\”…Remember, main goal of using a call center is to expand your business…\”…

Neotrope/Send2Press makes no claims of accuracy or suitability for any purpose. Desire2Learn and Re…

What made the farmworkers a movement in the 60′s and 70′s was 1) the labor of thousands of volunteers who believed that farmworkers needed a union and thus worked long hours for their room and board and weekly stipend, 2) the public’s willingness to act on behalf of the farmworkers by boycotting and , being responsive to boycott staff’s requests 3) the farmwokers willingness to act in concert to either strike or boycott. .

The Farmworkers Movement grew alongside the Anti-War and Civil Rights Movement. It was part of the times. However when the time came to turn the movement into an effective labor organization supported by the dues of its members, the leadership stumbled and ultimately fractured. Cesar wanted to perpetuate the idea of a movement excluding ideologues of all types (the exception being a belief that Cesar knew best) and keep in place the volunteer payment structure of the staff.

Much has changedduring the past 27 years. The mission of the UFW is no longer the empowerment of farmworkers. Indeed there is a disconnect between the UFW and farmworkers due to the socio-economioc base of its staff. Workers find it difficult to communicate and identify with outsiders driving Mercedes and Lexus’. The idea of a movement no longer focuses the passions of staff. They work 8-5 and get their paycheck. A movement encompasses beliefs and passions. It is questionable without the paycheck, the 400 salaried staff of the UFW woulld be present to carry on the work of the Union. Such is the calling of a movement. The UFW is not a movement, it is a business and as such should withstand the scrutiny of a business model. and leave the mission of building a movement to as yet an unforeseen, grass roots struggle for recognition and justice. How sad that the UFW will do all in its power to silence such a movement.

1. The writer has a long history of reporting on the labor movement and issues. That seems valuable.

2. The length of the series was extraordinary and, because of it, the current plight and struggles that face farmworkers got a lot of public scrutiny. This series was obviously given a lot of resources and the standards and practices of a working journalist for a major newspaper gives the report that much more credibility, in my opinion. If she was “lying,” it’s something she could lose her job over. Whereas, the opinions of supporters, including mine, are just opinions. And the UFW website didn’t refute any of the quotes that were presented by former staff, instead they only focused on their current works and did not, yet, address the issues of the past. They also have admitted that the writer had access to a lot of the historical records and documents which, again, lends a lot of credibility to the report.

3. The large number of interviews that were conducted gave us a remarkable breath of first hand experiences of the UFW in the early years. That was fascinating.

4. It was informative to better understand that the UFW movement is not the same as the UFW union. In fact, the thesis of the article was that the union has not thrived on the legacy of Chavez whereas the other non-profits are doing much better. The fact that the farmworkers themselves worked so hard, sacrificed so much, and volunteers around the country gave endless amount of their time and support makes the current union efforts seem dissapointing. This was a perspective I had not heard before.

5. Like Pacifica, like any institution, the people who run it are free to change directions. Pacifica has, in my opinion, changed directions by becoming an “experiment in democracy” rather than a radio/educational outlet for intelligent discussion and analysis and debate as the original founding members envisioned. Also, like the UFW, in order to change directions people were hurt, demonized, purged, and some left traumatized and shut out of the institution they had so loved and sacrificed for. Like the UFW, the New Pacifica LSBs and PNB has very little to say about the past….they are even trying to bury our historical corporate documents, and they are not apologizing to those they have demonized and hurt. I find this a particularly fascinating and disturbing trend and I think that both the UFW and Pacifica have to learn how to confront their own internal conflicts and, at times, brutalities, with honest and humble reflection. The impulse is to load the guns, circle the wagons, call for the “real supporters” to step forward and attack. However, I think that is a mistake and I wanted to point it out, again.

6. Like any non-profit, it is important that supporters and taxpayers have a chance to analyze the way money is spent. The second installment of the report have some very hard critiques and it’s going to be interesting to see if the various charities own up to some of these critiques or simply dismiss them as “propaganda.” That will be a matter of integrity and communications, both of which are good practice in the long run. I’m especially interested in how the Martin Luther King Farmworkers Fund (now called the Cesar E. Chavez Community Development Fund) is used. It is rare for organizations to have such a large endowment and I would think that the purpose of it would be to support programs that are helping farmworkers in need. *see below

So, I’m going to disengage from this thread now that I’ve made my points. I’m sure Jim will continue to post his deconstruction of the LA Times article, and I secretly wish he would do it on a more appropriate discussion list that is dedicated to discussing issues of the day. But I do appreciate all the very interesting details that he’s brought to this discussion and I esecially glad to know about the incredible work of the Immokalee Workers projects. Like it or not, every non-profit project is going to have more or less success based on the long term focus and the unity within their supporters. For a project to become a movement (like peace on earth) the message has to be broadly supported and the tactics have to be humanist and from integrity.

Later,
Nalini
===================
[exerpt of the LA Times series "Broken Contract"

Public records paint only broad outlines of how the UFW and its related charities take in and spend their money. The leaders are able to avoid scrutiny by not indicating the affiliations and transactions between related groups on federal tax returns and inaccurately reporting that they receive no government funding.

A rough picture drawn from tax returns shows that about half the organizations' spending goes to pay employees - more than million in 2004, the last year for which records are available.

About half of that is spent on employees who develop and staff the housing projects and the nine radio stations, including the latest and most successful, a hip-hop station in Bakersfield. Started by Cesar Chavez to communicate with farmworkers, the network known as Radio Campesina has evolved into a commercial success by adopting a format of mostly popular music and catering to a younger audience and advertisers eager to reach the growing Latino market.

"We want to be able to reach the younger generation, because, man, people are growing up not knowing Cesar Chavez, not knowing the Farm Worker Movement," Rodriguez said.

The Farm Worker Movement's financial strategy flows from a mission statement adopted a few years ago: Change the world by achieving economic and social justice and help 10 million Latinos by the year 2015.

"Before the vision statement, I was going crazy. I was thinking, 'I'm not doing my part,' " said Paul Chavez, who worried because his charitable efforts were not aimed primarily at farmworkers. "Now I can go to bed at night knowing that while I feel for the union and I want them to grow and all that, I understand that my contribution has to be made on the service side."

The bulk of the movement's income is on the side of the ledger that Chavez oversees. He runs the National Farm Workers Service Center, which collects rents on the apartments it owns and operates, along with fees for housing development and management, and revenue from radio ads and sponsorships.

In 2003, for example, the Service Center earned .8 million from managing property and .8 million from the radio stations and spent roughly the same amount operating those enterprises, according to financial statements. In 2004, the Service Center reported spending .1 million on management costs and .87 million on programs, primarily the housing projects and radio stations. After payroll, the largest expenses are rent, travel and interest on loans.

Chavez also heads the Cesar E. Chavez Development Fund*, which sits on almost million and uses the interest to help support the Service Center and other related charities - even as the UFW issues desperate pleas for the donations that make up one-third of the union's -million budget.

Cesar E. Chavez Community Development Fund

Formerly the Martin Luther King Farm Worker Fund, a farmworkers services foundation set up with employer donations. Now provides loans for Service Center housing projects and supports the Service Center, the Chavez Foundation and other related charities.

Budget

Net assets: ,817,031

Revenue: ,212,910

Expenses: 8,059
===========
[exerpt from the Collective Bargaining Agreement between Coachella Valley Citrus and UFW]

*ARTICLE 35: MARTIN LUTHER KING FUND
1. The Employer shall, effective January 1, 1978, contribute to the Martin Luther King Fund five cents (5¢) per hour for each hour worked by all workers covered by this Agreement. Expenditures or investments of contributions shall be solely restricted to those charitable and educational purposes for which federal tax exempt status has been granted to the Fund. The contributions shall not be expanded to the detriment of the Employer. The Martin Luther King Fund shall obtain and maintain federal tax exemption and all contributions by the Employer shall be deductible under the Internal Revenue Code.

2. All contributions due herein shall be remitted, on a weekly basis, for every worker covered by this Agreement. In conjunction therewith, a weekly summary report will be submitted covering the payroll period for which contributions are due. The summary report shall include the workers’ name, social security numbers, total hours worked by workers, total number of workers and amount of contributions.

3. The monies and a summary report shall be remitted to the Martin Luther King Fund, Post Office Box 80762, Los Angeles, California 90080, or such other address as designated by the Administrator of the Fund.

This is all in Cooper’s head, and he leads himself down the path of venom toward the UFW which is better aimed at those who are truly responsible for farmworker misery: growers and government. Not to mention media that skew the blame for that plight on people who are trying to make change but aren’t succeeding fast enough for the likes of Cooper/Pawel et al (though too fast for certain Republicans who’d like to see the UFW completely crushed and are the ultimate beneficiaries of hit pieces like Cooper’s and Pawel’s).

Cooper can’t have it both ways: UFW mailers don’t leave the false impression that the union has organized the bulk of the workforce, and Cooper certainly harbors no such impression. But he is willing to yelp about that straw man to build to a false criticism of the union. If Cooper were to instead devote his feeble energies fulltime to truly comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable, then . . . Nah, he just enjoys sowing the wind and hopes to avoid reaping the whirlwind.

http://tinyurl.com/dsnjx

Some of the stuff B. Clinton did in 1992 to enhance his chances of election were shocking. I’m not a Clinton-hater and have a certain amount of respect for her and even a bit of affection for him, but NOTHING these folks are likely to do in the arena of political opportunism is going to reach the level of “shocking” for me. If ever a dynamic duo had politics – at it’s least attractive – hard-wired into their genes, it’s Bill and Hill.

(I’ll get exercised over the differences between reasonably authentic liberals and total opportunists at the Congressional and Senatorial levels, but when it comes to Presidential candidates, I’m totally innured to the evil of two lessers.)

The facts speak for themselves, I mean, in his later years Chavez was all about media, and about self empowerment and less about the UFW. It goes to a bigger problem though – the outsourcing of work to “non profits” and a whole non profit/contractor/whatever mess that both unions and govenrments and private sector folk find themselves in. But that’s another story.

Most people don’t care about farmworkers, anyway, be they on the right or the left, so long as the lettuce is cheap.

And despite all the howling about “illegal immigrants” the fact is not one farm is going to be shutdown and asset forfeited because they hire and pay illegals to do the work.

Yes, conservative Republicans are concerned about FETUSES but NOT CONCERNED about children living in poverty. Why don’t you guys take your Viagra—and stop worrying women’s reproductive systems.

——————–

a-freakin’-men to that!

You are whores for wealthy right-wing elites, so your “care” for wage earners is seen in this light.

Your opinion on labor issues is tantamount to asking a crack-whore about intimate relationships, after being pissed on for a 5 dollar rock.

Speaking of which, there’s an excellent article in the current (Jan 16) issue of The New Republic detailing the lover affair between the Clintons and the Murdoch Media. The reason for this shocking smoochfest between two old enemies. One word. Three letters. Starts with “W” and ends with “r.”

1. The writer has a long history of reporting on the labor movement and issues. That seems valuable.

2. The length of the series was extraordinary and, because of it, the current plight and struggles that face farmworkers got a lot of public scrutiny. This series was obviously given a lot of resources and the standards and practices of a working journalist for a major newspaper gives the report that much more credibility, in my opinion. If she was “lying,” it’s something she could lose her job over. Whereas, the opinions of supporters, including mine, are just opinions. And the UFW website didn’t refute any of the quotes that were presented by former staff, instead they only focused on their current works and did not, yet, address the issues of the past. They also have admitted that the writer had access to a lot of the historical records and documents which, again, lends a lot of credibility to the report.

3. The large number of interviews that were conducted gave us a remarkable breath of first hand experiences of the UFW in the early years. That was fascinating.

4. It was informative to better understand that the UFW movement is not the same as the UFW union. In fact, the thesis of the article was that the union has not thrived on the legacy of Chavez whereas the other non-profits are doing much better. The fact that the farmworkers themselves worked so hard, sacrificed so much, and volunteers around the country gave endless amount of their time and support makes the current union efforts seem dissapointing. This was a perspective I had not heard before.

5. Like Pacifica, like any institution, the people who run it are free to change directions. Pacifica has, in my opinion, changed directions by becoming an “experiment in democracy” rather than a radio/educational outlet for intelligent discussion and analysis and debate as the original founding members envisioned. Also, like the UFW, in order to change directions people were hurt, demonized, purged, and some left traumatized and shut out of the institution they had so loved and sacrificed for. Like the UFW, the New Pacifica LSBs and PNB has very little to say about the past….they are even trying to bury our historical corporate documents, and they are not apologizing to those they have demonized and hurt. I find this a particularly fascinating and disturbing trend and I think that both the UFW and Pacifica have to learn how to confront their own internal conflicts and, at times, brutalities, with honest and humble reflection. The impulse is to load the guns, circle the wagons, call for the “real supporters” to step forward and attack. However, I think that is a mistake and I wanted to point it out, again.

6. Like any non-profit, it is important that supporters and taxpayers have a chance to analyze the way money is spent. The second installment of the report have some very hard critiques and it’s going to be interesting to see if the various charities own up to some of these critiques or simply dismiss them as “propaganda.” That will be a matter of integrity and communications, both of which are good practice in the long run. I’m especially interested in how the Martin Luther King Farmworkers Fund (now called the Cesar E. Chavez Community Development Fund) is used. It is rare for organizations to have such a large endowment and I would think that the purpose of it would be to support programs that are helping farmworkers in need. *see below

So, I’m going to disengage from this thread now that I’ve made my points. I’m sure Jim will continue to post his deconstruction of the LA Times article, and I secretly wish he would do it on a more appropriate discussion list that is dedicated to discussing issues of the day. But I do appreciate all the very interesting details that he’s brought to this discussion and I esecially glad to know about the incredible work of the Immokalee Workers projects. Like it or not, every non-profit project is going to have more or less success based on the long term focus and the unity within their supporters. For a project to become a movement (like peace on earth) the message has to be broadly supported and the tactics have to be humanist and from integrity.

Later,
Nalini
===================
[exerpt of the LA Times series "Broken Contract"

Public records paint only broad outlines of how the UFW and its related charities take in and spend their money. The leaders are able to avoid scrutiny by not indicating the affiliations and transactions between related groups on federal tax returns and inaccurately reporting that they receive no government funding.

A rough picture drawn from tax returns shows that about half the organizations' spending goes to pay employees - more than $12 million in 2004, the last year for which records are available.

About half of that is spent on employees who develop and staff the housing projects and the nine radio stations, including the latest and most successful, a hip-hop station in Bakersfield. Started by Cesar Chavez to communicate with farmworkers, the network known as Radio Campesina has evolved into a commercial success by adopting a format of mostly popular music and catering to a younger audience and advertisers eager to reach the growing Latino market.

"We want to be able to reach the younger generation, because, man, people are growing up not knowing Cesar Chavez, not knowing the Farm Worker Movement," Rodriguez said.

The Farm Worker Movement's financial strategy flows from a mission statement adopted a few years ago: Change the world by achieving economic and social justice and help 10 million Latinos by the year 2015.

"Before the vision statement, I was going crazy. I was thinking, 'I'm not doing my part,' " said Paul Chavez, who worried because his charitable efforts were not aimed primarily at farmworkers. "Now I can go to bed at night knowing that while I feel for the union and I want them to grow and all that, I understand that my contribution has to be made on the service side."

The bulk of the movement's income is on the side of the ledger that Chavez oversees. He runs the National Farm Workers Service Center, which collects rents on the apartments it owns and operates, along with fees for housing development and management, and revenue from radio ads and sponsorships.

In 2003, for example, the Service Center earned $10.8 million from managing property and $6.8 million from the radio stations and spent roughly the same amount operating those enterprises, according to financial statements. In 2004, the Service Center reported spending $1.1 million on management costs and $9.87 million on programs, primarily the housing projects and radio stations. After payroll, the largest expenses are rent, travel and interest on loans.

Chavez also heads the Cesar E. Chavez Development Fund*, which sits on almost $10 million and uses the interest to help support the Service Center and other related charities - even as the UFW issues desperate pleas for the donations that make up one-third of the union's $7-million budget.

Cesar E. Chavez Community Development Fund

Formerly the Martin Luther King Farm Worker Fund, a farmworkers services foundation set up with employer donations. Now provides loans for Service Center housing projects and supports the Service Center, the Chavez Foundation and other related charities.

Budget

Net assets: $9,817,031

Revenue: $1,212,910

Expenses: $638,059
===========
[exerpt from the Collective Bargaining Agreement between Coachella Valley Citrus and UFW]

*ARTICLE 35: MARTIN LUTHER KING FUND
1. The Employer shall, effective January 1, 1978, contribute to the Martin Luther King Fund five cents (5¢) per hour for each hour worked by all workers covered by this Agreement. Expenditures or investments of contributions shall be solely restricted to those charitable and educational purposes for which federal tax exempt status has been granted to the Fund. The contributions shall not be expanded to the detriment of the Employer. The Martin Luther King Fund shall obtain and maintain federal tax exemption and all contributions by the Employer shall be deductible under the Internal Revenue Code.

2. All contributions due herein shall be remitted, on a weekly basis, for every worker covered by this Agreement. In conjunction therewith, a weekly summary report will be submitted covering the payroll period for which contributions are due. The summary report shall include the workers’ name, social security numbers, total hours worked by workers, total number of workers and amount of contributions.

3. The monies and a summary report shall be remitted to the Martin Luther King Fund, Post Office Box 80762, Los Angeles, California 90080, or such other address as designated by the Administrator of the Fund.